. . .

dudzee A. Bendo and 1:aroid Peldman . . . . . ..

~.

Tinere were tv70 hypotheses:mde about the differences i n s e l f concept between lot7 income women rrith and without a husband present,: Kusband absent women were hypothesïzedas:having a stronper seLf concept v h i l e husband ,

present rJomënt.?ere pcrceived. a s .being more s a t i s f i e d w i t 5 t h e i r l i f e circum- stánces. .- Et-ronger: s e l f .concept t3as def ined a s havinp higher s e l f esteem, , .

lower secónd. s ex .:attïtudes,: having a more instrumental s e l f concept, lìaving , :

- ~a-+ee l ing of greater5opfimism about the future, and having an. i s t e rpa l : s e l f concept. , Gtea te r s a t i s f ac t ion tqas defined a s experiencing m o d sa t i s f ac t iön

- with zhe t r ad i t i ona l - fenale a reas of concern, more sa t i s f ac t ion I ~ i t h werk,' heal th , f inanciall s i t ua t ion , children and overa l l l i f e sa t i s fac t ion : There. was s,ubstantiation of these hypotheses. The data were derived from a study of 1325' lo~.r~.income r~omenwhoi-e.r- interviewed with a str t ictured questionaire. The research design was a 2 x 2 i 2 a s a l y s i s ,of .varjance with two welfare groups - presént ly welfare and previously ve l fa re , two empl'oyment groups - - '

iqorking and non-ruorlcing and husband-present, husbana-absent groups.

I

*The data base f o r t h i s repor t was prepared for the :!anpower Adminictration, U. S. Department of Labor, under research contract No. 51-34-69-07 authorized by the Social Security Act. A 1 1 opinions a r e tliose of the authors

iiesearch on wonzn i n poverty emphasizes t he family s t ruc tu re of t he indigent (Herzog, 1Y66; Kreisberg, 1970; Levis, 1960; ilarsden, 1969; Rainwater, 1967). This b iases and limits our comprehension of t h e women i~ivolved. They a r e portrayed a s e i t h e r mothers i n poverty

q o r '-husbandless

nothers ' and the concern of researchers i s v i t h t h e i r background and chi ld rear ing prac t ices . This o r ien ta t ion assumes t h a t a woman is not an individual i n her own r i g h t . Instead, she is viewed a s f u l f i l l i n g a ro l e . iJeedless t o say, understanding a woman is inadequate i f she is described merely as a mother or wife.

By studying woman as tLey perceive themselves, one can fur ther under- stand t h e i r personal i ty s t ruc tu re s and dynamics. This: or i ~ n t a t i o n a l s o . reveals the importance of t he s e l f -concept. i n r e l a t i o n t o yhe women's functioning 'in ; t h e i r world. , : I f wonen have, a pos l t ive s e l f -concept, i t i s possible, f o r them t o overcoie any b a r r i e r s t h a t might occur in.. t h e i r live.@. , .

! . . .. .

A search of t he l i t e r a t u r e revealed few s tud ies , i f a n y . a t a l l , d i r e c t l y re la ted t o t he present topic:!* Bishop (1972), f o r example, examined

. ~

t he re la t ionsh ip between var ious sociological var iab les and the r e l a t i v e : .. s t rength of self-concept among welfare mothers. T'ne r e s u l t s snowed tha t t h e , , ~ : subjec t s h a d r e l a t i v e l y s t rong se l f -concepts. hey cons i s ten t ly ra ted them- se lves superior t o t h e i r refereace group of "nost Negro women2'i-.ge concluded t h a t t he r e l a t i v e s t rength ofse l f- concept was a function of t h y ab i l i t y . t o cont ro l t h e i r extant s o c i a l world. . .

Sylvia r , l c ~ i l l a n (1967) studied t he asp i ra t ions of low-income mothers. Her f ind ings ind ica te t h a t the mothers were not s a t i s f i e d witia t h e i r present

.*Syatematic'research was conducted i n the following journals: Welfare i n Review (1963-1972), Journal of Xarriage and the Family (past 10 years) , and the Journal of Human iiesources (past 8 years) . A Sa t iona l Clearinnhouse fo r i~iental Heaith Information dt~i~11) l i t e r a t u r e search wag , - - prepared on the topic, and computerized search& of t he jsducation Resources Information (WIC) manual and Psychological Abstracts were conducted. Per t inent l f t e r a t u r e , however, was scarce o r inadequate ,

corditioils, and desired a be t t e r l i f e f o r them~elves , t h e i r children, and t h e i r husbads . T:lcJ- a l s o e;;l,res$cci 'aor.,e .a$tiaiso? about t n a i r future .

Contrary t o couuon balfof , ?:xiup s tud ie s iad ica te t ha t iorr-kr~come person! do not have l e sce r sclf-cot~cepts. Tiie seE-cotice~ts of lover- class ind2viG- ua ls were not 4ifZsreiit from those of t h e uiddle-ciass (1Iil1, 1957; >iccUonald aud Gynther, I3C-3; Cilverzan, 19u4). Zn l i g h t of these studios, it seeas t h a t poverty i s uo'i associated t;ith a nore negative self-cdsrcepQt

*-- ~ ~ , i s reporr i s co;icerned,::rith rile de~elo~i~r len t of a 2osi t ive s e l f- oonce2t a s re la ted t o tbe mrital s t a rus of l~~;-i l lcoii~e tioneii. In consiriera- t i o a of t h i s , i t i s .. ~recassary t o exglore. t ne gossXcle exteii: t o ~ii1ic;i uar lcz s t a t u s Influence3 the l i v e s of tkase 1;rOi'ieu.

. .

U i c r S, i o s s i (1'372) claL;;s titat t he 2ressures a r e particularly. stroil8 upon 2 2 ~ 1 s t o a c c e t t he visv: t:;at ;;zrriaga is e s sen t i a l t o ac;;ievo r ~ i ~ ~ l l c i l

s a t i s f ac t ion a;;~ ha,>inesa i.1 ;riult.icj~d. $Pic2 ti>-. soc ia i iza t ion s t reaaes t he drs i rabi l i t ; . of a a r r i a ~ c , riosleu witiiorit hus'uailds l a t e r 2r l i f e mould a:>eriencc aubivaient fee l ings iil .t': AIL* -I- res,>eci?. E'urtherzore, \:i.thia our society, t he zbit;.;cce of a i i u&t~- r~ ;,as beea 'lookc6 urov with Lisfavor an2 ,

scorr;. A s a r e s u l t , xc l : \.~oueil k,ii;vr o f t ez Lrcn s t iguxt ized slii ostracized . by t h e i r comau~ii tL~s. .";his sucgests t h a t wocieu v i t l ~ c u t husbandz rrould be a t a uisaiva:.ta;;e. 'i'iiey idust coiie t o t e r : ~ s - ~ ~ ~ i r i i both t h e i r ovm, parceptioc

e i r s i t u a t i o u a s r lel l a s societgr:s conr imat ion of tilei?? s i tua t ion . Co.~se~uentljr, i x ~ order t o i~sncile tkis s i tua t iou ; tne women vould have t o

, d e v e l o ~ stren:itii arid c l r t e r ~ k ~ i a t l o x ~ or t h e i r circuzstances would becoae

011 tile o t i l x :,an&, ncrcia;; :lot be viewed a s cesi raLle adon;; sose loir-incoie ;i.omen r e ~ a r d l e s s CC societal. no rm, Inte2sive case s t u u i ~ s OE

lo7.i-iccme woaen a;id t h e i r famil ies rrere conducted by Zralicfs aild Dsuzherty (1572) in crrnjunctioii riitll ti:f ? e l ~ i : ~ : study. Tiley fourid t i ~ a t nuch of tke

r i t a l i n s t a b i l i t y experierrced by t L i e ~:nde11 :yas r e l i t & t o t he lac;: of rltetable s k i l l s , *,oar a t t i t udcc towzrJ vror!;, 2nd underew.plopa~t of t he i r sbarido, boyfriends, and o r a d For na%y of the w m m , d i v m c i n ~

t h e i r iiu~baniis was t!~e 105t fqor ta iz t . s t ep i n fredn;l i~ theasalves froi* i;lsta- b i l i t y (a. 21, ,401. 11) . These rroinc-1:eubodleci strerigth and deteri~irxitioii 1 r e . I n t k i i r ; cese, t x y ~~iould not be shackled by t r ad i t i ona l rioru 'out on t h e cont ra r r , ::oulZ benef i t by r i6d ing . t:~cfiselves of a1' i i icornpXe~t

t;lai: nujja.d-absrnit -.,.omen :!ill ilsve co devalo,> stro;.gcr i ,crsu;~al i t ier al:G iririlcitid; i n order t o :i:lsadle ::,dir s;i:uatioi~z. Ti.cj. rrould be forced t o re -~~s : , , iLLe . t i ieir existence, rcsult i i i , . iic i c luarer ~ ~ d e r s t z s d i u g 02 t;im-- seivzs a s relateii ' t o t:ielr l i f e circuast,iiiccs, T::er+fore, t.ley a:iould i.~a-.ii-

.~ ,

;larr ied women, however, have l i f e s t y l e s consonant with t h e i r social- i za t ion and the norms of the la rger society. They need not experience ambivalent f ee l ings i n t h i s respect, arid nence, would not f e e l t he pressure t o change themselves o r t h e i r l i f e circumbtauces. Consequently, they should experience greater f ee l ings of s a t i s f ac t ion with themselves and t h e i r l i v e s i n neneral.

nypothesis I. liusband-absent wo-sen w i l l have a stronger self-concept i n comparison t o married women. Such a comparison, however, does not necessar i l imply a causal re la t ionship. Stronger self-concept is operationally defined a s having a higher l e v e l of self-esteem, having lower "second sex:' a t t i t udes , manifesting more instrumental behaviors as well as expressive a b i l i t i e s , having a fee l ing of g rea te r optimism about tile future, and having a fee l ing of control over one's destiny.

Tine notion of women a s t he "second sex" means tha t women a r e perceived by themselves and by men a s objects ra iher than a s subjects. A s objects , they f e e l they a r e used by otners. have l i t t l e o r no independent i den t i t y , and gain t h e i r major s a t i s f ac t ions l i v ing through others ra ther than throu t h e i r own accomplishments (ilsauvoir, 1949).

Women a s Se onoh t n r w itemawhich the women rated -hrsrflecd with them. The items (

asked whether t he women thought they should vote a s t h e i r husbands voted s ince he knows more, whether they thought it was su f f i c i en t for a wonan t o obtain respect throug!l t h e accomplishzcnts of hcr husbhnd and children, ar,d whether they thought a job gave more pres t ige t o a woman than Seine a housewife. The la rger t he score t h e more t h e more t h e response indicated agrqement with the notion of woman a s a second sex.

Self-esteem w a s indexed by four items. They were t h e women's feel ings about where she stood i n r e l a t i o n t o other women she knew; 1. on how well she did a t r a i s ing children, 2, a t l e a ~ n i n g new t h with others, and 4. on ove ra l l fee l ings about lier herself on a f i v e point scale, r a n g i ~ g from "0" t o " t he more competent she f e l t in r e l a t i o n t o others.

I Instrumental and expressive behaviors came under t he gensral heading of self-concept. This va r i ab l e was measured by ten items divided in to f i v e instrumental and f i v e expressive behaviors. On each the women rated themselves is t o wl~ethcr they thought they manifested or did not nnnifcs t the behavior.

The instrurne~ital items were: e f f i c i e n t , good head f o r finances, ambitious, speaks her mind, and wel l organized4 The expressive items were: affect ionate ,

cautious, pa t ien t , good l i s t ene r , and good a t smoothing things over.

The women's an t ic ipa t ion of change i n the fu tu re was indexed b y o n e item which asked w-~in the next f i v e years t h a t did not w happen i n t he l a s t f i v e years. his item was ra ted - on a ten s t ep s c a l e u s i n g a ladder format. The bottom of the-laddel? represented a worst way of l i f e and the t ap represented the bes t o r ideal 'way of l i f e . The respon-

en ts marked where they thought they belonged on t h i s continuum.

L z s s f _ c o n t r o l re f lec ted the extent t o which the women f e l t they were in c o n t r ~ e c t i o n of t h e i r l i ve s . A high score indicated tha t f e l t "external" events beyond t h e i r control determined what happened t o . t w h i l e a low score indicated t h a t they f e l t t h e i r own effoi?ts,and des i res were e f f ec t ive i n producing outcomes.

h Five items indexed t h i s var iable . They were: 1. t h e job comes befor fun, 2. people w i l l take advantage of you, 3. do not expect too much out of l i f e , 4. t he re i s n ' t much you can do about how things t u r n out, 5. you can' t count on people, The items were asked i n a framework of what t he mother thought should be passed on t o her children, The women rated the items i n terms of how much they agreed or disagreed. High scores along 8 "0" t o "4" continuum indicated an external locus of control . \ . . , ,

2

' Hypothesis 11. Husband-present women experience s a t i s f a c t t h e i r l i v e s i n comparison t o husband-absent women. Greater s a t i s f ac t ion is operationally defined a s experiencing more sa t i s f ac t ion f rom ' the t r ad i t i ona l female a reas of concern, more sa t i s f ac t ion with themselves, t h e i r work, h e a l and f inanc ia l s i t ua t ion , t h e i r children, t h e i r job, and t h e i r ove ra l l l i f e s i tua t ion .

The var iab le termed sources of problems and sa t i s f ac t ions was divided f i v e groups: t r a d i t i o n a l i.emaLe areas of concern (5 items)~, personal fac t ion (3 i t e m ) , and then s ing le i t e m s of work, health, and f inanc ia l

s i t u a t i o n . Tie f i v e i t e n s index*g t r a d i t i o n a l female a reas w e r e : children , f r iends , housework, churcli, husb2lnd o r men i n general. The three personal

items were: w i t h t he way you dress and look, and have t o do what you want.

r inging from "Or' t o "4" . The higher the score thc more the women experienced sa t i s f ac t ion y i t h the' , -

The personali ty a t t r i b u t e s of husband-present women were compared with

The da ta f o r t h i s report were pa r t of a l a rge study on the e f f e c t s of em?loyiaent of low-income women on the family (Feldman and Feldman, 1972). Evidence f o r the extent t o which the aforementioned self-concept var iables d i f f e r en t i a t ed the mar i ta l groups was found i n the Feldman and Feldman study. Their r e s u l t s showed t h a t employed wonen were ' c l ea r ly d i f fe ren t ia ted from nonenployed women i n t h e i r self-concepts. They were higher i n t h e i r s e l f - esteeru, were more instrumental, f e l t they could c o n t r o l -t h e i r destiny, and were more optim

. fac t ion with t . . ... . , .. , .

,,

. The study was carr ied out i n Ney Yorli S t a t e "in urban area,s ( c i t i e s under . . . . ~. ~ '

- . 100,000 population) and the small towns and r u r a l a r G s dependent on these- . .:., .: . , ~.

, c i t i e s . The area was nei ther c o n t . ~ u o u s l y r u r a l nor urban. . - . . . .

, ,. ', : .. Ident i f ica t ion of t h e Population

among the four c e l l s was i r regula r fo r the presently welfare group. The l a rges t was c e l l 1 - nonemployed, husband-absent women. For t h i s c e l l every th i rd case was sampled. For c e l l 2 - .non&mPloycd, husband-present women - every other case was sampled. For ttle other two c e l l s , a l l avai lable cases were used

. . Sampling Procedure fo r the Fszrrly Welfare s

The e n t i r e population o f formerly welfare bases were included,. The I - Social Service Department sen t a list o f a l l cases closed from six months t o

three? year@ whicn had n tealage cb i id .

' , DATA GATHERING

Data were gathered i n t h r ee d i f f e r e n t ways: l a rge number of women, i n depth s tud i e s of. worn em?loyment pat terns , and a par t ic ipan t observer study of a r u r a l poverty a i n iqorthern kppalachia, The da t a fo r the present discussion were gathered , through t h e interview technique. ~ a e r v l e w took ,place ,h the respondent's

.?*-q L$&& .Table I ,.=.....;<.g* g$$ggC$sarital Effect .for t he Summed Variable ..*,: .-**a

'T.7omen a s Second Ze::"* . , . . .

Item . S u s b a n d- a b s e n t Ilusband-present overall mean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . , . : . . .: . . . A .

. ,

Do you think it i s suf- f i c i e n t f o r any womari t 0 . \

g e t c e s p e c t thzouph t h e .. . . . . . accomp~ishments of her . ,

husband and childzeït?, 2.70 . . . .O01 \ . ' . . . . . . , i . '. :

Do you think a job gives more pres t ige t o a woman than being a house~$ife? -:-

Do you think a vrife should vote t he vray her husband does?

Overall mean

Je O = strongly disagree, 1 - disagzee some.i7!iat, 3 = agree somewhat,

4 = s e o n g ag.-.ee & code ïevis'ed ...

more p re s t i ge than being a housewife (recoded mean = 2-19), but had'a c lear ant ipathy about voting a s t he Iius'aariti did because he was an au thor i ty (0.81). Apparently, they did, not have uuch confidence i n t h e husband o r f e l t they should have a m i m i of t h e i r o m on t h i s matter.

The husband-present, a s prediçted from ~ e a u v o i r ' s theory, a g ~ e e d mare s t rongly with t h e notion of perceiving themselves a s t h e second sex on- the i r ove ra l l mean score (2.03 vs. 1.86; p .01) and on two of t he t h r ee items indexed. These women f e l t it was s u f f i c i e n t t o obtain respect through tha aCcomplishments of other family members and were more l i k e l y t0 f e e l they should vore as t h e husband voted.

. .

There was a s ign i f i can t . i n t e r ac t i on of employment on miritai. s t a t u s which shed sone fu r the r l i g h t on t he da t a

There was less e f f e c t of employnent on t he husband-absent. For the , husband-present, the nonemployed group was more wi l l ing t o f e e l t h a t t h e i r sa t i s fac t%ons snould cone by 1Tving through other family members. I f women were employed, they d id not f e e l a s d r a m t o family mat ters with or without a :lusband present. These women hac! taken a ïaore aggressive r o l e in t he family.

A s i gn i f i can t i n t e r ac t i on of welfare oq mardtal s t a t u s a l s o existed f o r t h i s item.

I

For t he husband-absent, t he re was p rac t i ca l l y no e f f e c t of welfare -status f o r t he item, but f o r the husband-prcsent, the welfare gsoup tras more wil l ing t o f e e l t h a t t h e i r l i v e s received meaning through f a c i l i t a t i n g the '

l i v e s of others. \

There wak no s i s n i f i c a n t differente between the two groups on tlie second item -- a paid job gives more pres t ige t o a woman than being a housewife. There was, however, a s i gn i f i can t i a t e r ac t i on of welfare on mar i ta l s t a t u s for thia item.

Inteïaction,oi- Enployment on Marital Status for the Item:

"Do you fee1 that it should be sufficienc £o+ any

woman . . .:o . . get respect, through. thc:.accomplishments '. . . . . . . . . .. .

of he-= husbaad and childïen?"

. .

. . . . . Table I11

Interactiotl ofEmployrnent on V I r i t a l ' ~ t a t u s f o ï the Item: , . . ,.

"Do you fee1 that it should be suzf ic ient for any

woman t o eet respect through the acconplishments

of her husband and children?"

Hucband-absent Husband-present

Welfare 2.71 3.19

Formerly Welf ere

5

?or the husband-absent, however, t h e tuelfare group had a higher score indica- :ing tha t they f e l t L t was more important t o be a housewife than a worker.

For a l 1 th ree Fteios ii;ciexixg womenas o second sex, che group with the highest a l legiance t o t h i s idea was the welfare, nonenployed, husband-present (man = 3.261, while t he lc:~fst or "inost emascipated" ftas the formerly welfarc enployed a ~ d ~ a r r i o d (nean = 2.31). . .

. . . :.7+$.;>?,y L?. . -.e

Consonant ~ r i t h the f i rsc hypothesis, the fiad,ings, indicated tilat i£$:.:~.:$i:." -.>.--~!. .- .

womeu did not have a husbnnd a t home they had lover second sex a t t i t u d s s a s indexed by these i t e m . 'i'iat is , chey were more l k l y to perceive them- ielves a s subjects , while married wonen perceived thkíbselves more a s objects31-i

"SS %E'

these r?omeu a r e able t o reach l e v e l s of e s t e m an& conipetence wi th in t he i r * . communitles regardless of t h e i r mari ta l s ta tus . . , .

i ,$$$iL:With respect ro t he spec i f i c items, the women f e l r most competent i n the i n t e rpe r sona l~ s k i l l s of gettining along with :ethers!, next i n t he ab i l i ty -<o be mothers, than i11 learning new thlngs. They f e l t l e a s t a b l e w h e n asked d i r e c t l y . . abouthow competent they were comoaxison t o others. The e t h i c Of n o t . ' , , -

bragging a lou t oneself &y ~liavri depreosed the sc0r.e , of, , thiii item. . . . 111 general,,,;; , . t'+%;:?.:+~.!..*:

y . ., ' -2 ..,%., >.. these tronien fclt f a i r l y good about thunselves. . ..,* :Z :L:.;: . . . . . ................ . . ; . . . . , . . . $!.i .. i' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .:,i*...,.. . . ' . . . . .: . , . : , , - . z . .; , . . .... ' + . .: , . , , :. ' .;.. %.. .\ q,>

." ' : . , . . ', ' - . . . . . . . . . . ; . . . . . . . . . . & C . . , . . I , ' ' . . .....

...r , : : , . j , ; . , . : . : . : : s, S: . . \ . . .<~..> ., ̂; . . . . . . i , , . . . t , ; < _.,. , : . . . , .. . r :, . "' ..

. '. . -, . . .< ...z..... s' .-, ., . . . . ' -' . i!j ' . .- : :;.: : , . . . . ,2< -.: <$j,; ' 6 'J.'..< ;, . , ! . . i: . , c .... <,:',', ... '.; . ; )j, '.., 1%. : .'.; .. . .;..... : , , . \,- .i .- . . . . . . ' . . . . . . , . J : . . , . b.'..>,: , ;::, 1, . , ,, . , . . . s. . . ...... . .

. A / ' . ! . :. ,:.*' .:.:."i?' ,.,. . ,... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 'ct. ' .;,j. j ,s l: . ; i . . , .. . . * : r , : ; ' ,. . ' I... , .i t . , . , 3 . , .. < ,, . . ! : ,,, ,. . - ' ' '"3 . ' . ;I,,. - . , . '. r: ' . , . ' V . . - , .: , .,. . '. . . .

Q/: ,<$...y;.:.:,.. ; ,+a ., .z;, ,.:' . : . . . . . ., . , . . . ,, ;..':'.;.. . , r . . . ' L.. .i . . . '., . , , '>V . I . . . s . . . . . . . . .

<, .... _:, . ' . . ' . , , . . . <.- . . . . . . . .. y~kj: f ; : i%: , : , . ; . . , . l , ., , . , . I I , . . _ . , . . I . . t . , 3 r .li, " . . . . . ..: .. .... '.'.,.L " J. , ,

i > : y . - . . , : . . . . . . . . . . , .. . . . . . . ,:, .. : a ..., *.-, , : ?, I '.. : . . . . ....r;i....,..I: ..! .,,., 1.. *.i: i . ' ., :.i, , . :.. . >?'. , , . I . , ' . . . . . . . .-'L,; .; .:+,. $'L> .'X.'. . . . , .<

l , : ; ; . ' ?.>~,i .., .s .,,! %?.>L, . .. ... . . ; . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . $,,J..,,. :." b $ v. -. .:C,., ... "<<....f. T:. C<.% . . . ...... , , , - ." .'. t , . . , , ; :x ". .' , i. ,,, . ' : F : , . ;:. .f u 'y';:Ip$J,:l~&$:<:fi~ . . . .. : : . . . . : . .;,, - ,;.i. .,*. , j . . . . T . . . . . . . . , ... . . !", . . . .

. , , . t F .' . .

-- .

Table IV

In te rac t ion of Welfare on i&iiiitai Status for t he Iten

"Do you thinlc a job gives uoïe pres t ige t o

, a vrcman than being a housewife?;' ,,

! . '

&$band-absent ìneans Hucbasd-present ,- Welfare 2.24

. .

Pozmerly Relfat-e i.60

Getting alone with people 2.53 ' 2.56 n.s. 2.57

Raising Children

Learning ' new things

* 0 = worse than most parents you know, 1 = not: quit 3 = a l i t t l e better, 4 = much better

.e as wel l , 2 = about the same

. . . , ~ , The husband-present had a s i g n i f i c a ~ i t l y higher l e v e l of self-esteem on

one of t h e four i t e n s - r a i s ing children. Por t he husband-absent, t h i s prob- ably s i g n i f i e s the d i f f i c u l t y of running . . a household withqut the ex t r a , . , ,

support of a L~usband.

Tne f itst hypothesis was not supported. The husband-absent women did not have a h igher . l eve1 of self-esteem. There was, however, no dif ference

The magnitude of t he mcaiis indicated t h a t the women f e l t chey were f i r s t of a l l "affectionate" and then "cautious?', two expressive items. The next two highest s e l f r a t i ngs were instrumental ones - being "eff ic ient" and having a "good head f o r finances." They f e l t they were lowest a t being "well organized" and "speaking t h e i r mind .I1 The two lowest expressive items were being "eood a t smoothing things over': and being a "good l i s tener ." Overall, the mean score f o r t he expressive items was 2.65 and the mean f o r t he instrumental items was 2.48., In general , t he women perceived themselves as somewhat,mo expressive then instrumental a s measured by tnese iterus. Their hignest s a t t r i b u t e s were expressive ones while t h e i r lowest were instrumental.

There was no s ign i f i can t d i f fe rence between the r a r i t a l groups on s e l f perception a s expressive, a f inding which did not support the f i r s t hypothesis. In agreement with the f i r s t hypothesis, however, husband-absent woaen did feel they were more instrumental than d id married vromen (means = 2.53 vs. 2.43; p = .05) .

way of l i f e ; top = bes t or i d e a l way of l i f e

Self -Concept , .,<' . I , , . :: - -, . . . .. - ,. .:.: .: . ,:: ,,..,-?. , Table VI,

. . . . . - . . , . . ... . . . & . 1 b < : A . w * - . : s w . :

Xarital Effect for tte instr

um

ental and Ex?reseive

Self-concept . . Items:

"~ow'nuch would you say you are like the f~llowi~~?"* .

Item - Xusband-absent Husband-present E Overall near

Instrumental

efficient 2.91 2.73 .01 2.82

good head for finances 2.88 2.61 .001 2.75

ambitious 2.64 2.51 ,001 2.58

spealcs her nind

well organized

Overall mean

Expressive \ a£ f ectionate

cautious

patient

good listener

good at smoothing things over

Overall mean 2.67 2.64 n.s. 2.66

n G = not at all like this, 1 - a lirtle like this' 2 = sometrhat like this, 3 = a lot like this, 4 = very much like this

i , . . . / _ . , . . .~. . . , .

*$t 1 tail test .: - : . .,

I , . ,,. , . . .

The i t e m with t h e highest level of ex t e rna l i t y (highest mean) Wasyhe 0 ~ ~ s b~fo<r?_ -- &nu, t he next bighest wak t h a t .'people w i l l . take advantage

-f you," The f i r s t i tes represen ts a highly pu r i t an i ca l work e th ic . The ex t represents t h e i r impotence i11.relation t o t h e world of individuals rea 0 explo i t them. Their low expectations were re f lec ted in the next item aving t o do with teaching chi ldren no t t o expect t o o much of l i f e 50 the ill not be disappointed.

5 The f inding of s imi la r l e v e l s o f locus of coh t ro l d id ao t support ' ' , ',',~

t he f i r s t hypothesis which s ta ted t h a t husband-absent women would experience ,: greater f ee l i ngs of .control over t h e i r l ives . Possibly, t he tendency toward z , an ex te rna l locus ,of con t ro l by both wr i ta l zroups suggests t h a t overwhelming ".: l i f e circumstances ov,erride t h e . r e l a t i v e importance of mar i ta l s t a t u s i n t h l s l , case.

/ iIypothesis 11. Uusband-present woroen w i l l expericmce grea te r s a t i s f a c t i ~ n with t h e i r l i v e s i n couparison t o husband-absent women, Greater Sat isfact ion i s operatioilal ly defined a s experiencing more s a t i s f ac t i on from the t rad i - t ional .female a r ea s of.cor~carn, more sd t i s f ac t i ou with theuselves, t h e i r work ilaalrh, and, financiaj. s i t ua t i on , -he i r chi ldren, t h e i r job ,and t h e i r o ~ e r a l E 1 s i tua t ion .

SOUkCES OF PkOdGiiiS AiGl STISFACTIOiJS

Comparison of L i fe Sa t i s f ac t i on Areas

T.ne women c l ea r ly founa most s a t i s f a c t i o n i n the t r a d i t i o n a l female areas . Personal areas were next. Except f o r t h e i r hea l th and especial ly t h e i r f i n a n c i a l s i tua t ion , one could conclude t h a t they found t h e i r l i v e s more s a t i s fy ing than not . The difference between f inding s a t i s f a c t i o n from

Table VZ

I4arital Ef fec t f o r ehe . ' ~acu . . 01 i tems:

"Children should be taught that.. . I 1 * . :

Husband-absent glsiand-Present & Overall mean

3.04 3.01 3.0: . , . . . .

people w i l l take advantage :

. of you 2.75 " . ' 2 .. .

Do not expect too much out of l i f e

I s n ' t much t o do about how : things t u rn out : "

, . , . Can't count on people n.s. - 1.52 - - 1 55 L

. . . . . .

Overall meen 2_. 24 2 . 2 6 n.s. 2.25

4 C 0 = disagree strongly, 1 = what, 4 = agree strongly

. . disagree .,soiI&?hat, provided, 3 = agree son

Overall mean 2.08 2.33 .001 2 . 2 0 .

-X 0 = very important problem, 1 = somewhst a problem, 2 = neither a problem nor.

satisfaction, 3 = get some satisfaction, & = get a ' lot of sat isfact io

t he t r ad i t i ona l female sources and from employment was c l ea r and one would not expect t h e women t o be rushing toward euployment ra ther than toward the

The husband-present were n i g ~ ~ i f i c a n t l y more s a t i s f i e d than were the husband-absent r7omen with t h e i r l i v e s (means - 2.33 vs. 2.06; p = .0001), a (f inding i n agreement with rile second nyporhesis.

I n t he next sect ion, t he t r ad i t i ona l and personal a reas w i l l be discussed in more d e t a i l .

Sat isfact ion from Tradi t ional Areas . . , , . . , . .. . . . . .. . ~ . . , . . *, . . . .. .

, . , . . , . , . .,. .

. . . . . . -,, , .. ..

A f m s within the t rad i t ione e r e above the neu t r a l poini of 2.00. The most sa t i s fy ing area was chi ldren followed closely by . . .

; friends. There' was a s ign i f ican t overa l l mar i ta l e f f e c t with those with husbands indicat ing more sa t i s f ac t ion (means = 2.92 vs. 2.63; p a .001). The husband-absent consis tent ly experienced l e s s sa t i s fac t ' ion on a l l f i v e items. There was, hot~ever, only one sisi7ificant difference. , The item, satis- . factLon with men - the lowest source of s a t i s f ac t ion among the f i v e items - ~howed ' a s ign i f i can t mar i ta l e f f e c t 'with those with husbands achieving more. s a t i s f ac t ion (mean = 2.99 vs. 1.88; 1) = .001j.

Overall, t h e t indings supported the second hypothesis'. >farried women were more s a t i s f i e d with t he t r a d i t i o n a l female a reas of concern than were husband-eibsent women. . , . . . .

Personal Sa t i s fac t ion

tal Effect for the Items:

erna ale Areas of Satisfaction" . ~

Item - Husband-present E Overall I ..

Children 3.24 n.s. ' 3.1;

-Menas

House~.>ork

Church

. .

Table K

arital.$Gfcct for the Items:

. . . .

Item Eusband-absent 'il~sband-Present E,. i ~ v e r a l l , mean

. . . .

HOW happy you f e e l 2.42 2.86 , .001 2.63,

Dress and 1001s 46 2.46 n.s. 2.46

Freedom to do what yolt want 2.25 - - n.s . - 2.41 2.33 ' - ,

Overall mean 2.38 2.58

, .

mari ta l s t a t u s and personal s a t i s f ac t i on were re la ted . Of t he th ree personal s a t i s f a c t i o n items, only one had a s ign i f i can t mar i ta l e f f e c t , and t h i s ifem was "how happy do you feel?" . The husband-present group experienced greater happiness than did tile husband-absent group (ueans = 2.86 vs. 2.42; p = .001). There was a l s o an i n t e r ac t i on e f f ec t of employment on mar i ta l s t a t u s f o r t h i s item.

I\ -

Employment had a g rea te r impact oil t he husband-absent group's hapl)illesa, with the employed f ee l i ng happier than the nonexnployed(m@.ans ;. 2.59 vs. 2.33). The lowest l e v e l of happiness was 40unp f o r t he nonemployed, husband-absent group (2.33)) Tne husband-present &oup d id not vary i n t h e i r fee l ings of personal happiness whether or oot they were working. The main point here i s t h a t i f a woman does nor have a man, she experiences grea te r happiness when she nas a job. On t;le other nand, i f a woman has a man, t he job does not matter with respect t o psrsonnl happiness.

A s ign i f i can t i n t e r ac t i on a l s o exis ted f o r welfare on mar i ta l s t a t u s fo r the personal happiness item. -

Welfare s t a t u s h2d a greater impact or, the married group's happiness. Within t h i s group, t he formerly welfare were happier than t he current ly welfare (means = 3.00 vs. 2.74).

For these women, happiness appears t o be having a man, a job, and get t ing off welfare. Overall, the f indings were consis tent with t he second hypothesis which s ta ted t h a t married women would experience grea te r pe-isonal s a t i s f ac t i on in comparison t o husband-absent women.

AREAS OF SATISE'ACTIOI'

The women found grea tes t sac i s fac t ion with t h e i r chi ldren, but i n t e r- es t ing ly they f e l t t h a t the world of work was next i n t o t a l sa t i s fac t io l l ,

Table X* r

i

Interaction of Employment on Marital Status for the Item:

"Xow do feel personally, how happy do .you feel?" . . . . .

Employed

Table XI1

In te rac t ion of ?!elfare on Marital Status f o r t he Item:

"How do you f e e l personally, how happy do you fee l?"

Welfare 2.41 , -

2.74 - ~-

Formerly VJelf a r e 2.46

p < .05

Areas of Satisfaction

Table XIII

PWiital Effect for the Items:

"Satisfaction v i t h MOX:~, children, and overall l i f e situation"*

Item - usb band-ab8ez"~uobznd-orese:~t E Overall a

6.%5'. Satisfaction with childrer, 6.80 n;s. , . .. 6.82 . . . .

Satisfactioo v i t h job 5:&1 ' ' 5'.97. n.s. 5.89

Overall l i f e situation 5.16 5.93 .001 5.55 c"-

. . , .' * . . ).

Rated on a ten poitlt ladder scale: bottom = l eas t degree of satisfaction; top the most satisfact ion

'U. . . , , , , , .

~ ~ . ~ , , , . . , ,~ . ,- ~. . , , , . .

. . , , . . . , . . . , r - . . . \ ! ' . , , 1 1

to h&kied "dnien: ~ h & & wdmen agk3'ear. p :b& .tfie.::o&s Gho ]&ld f afce 'steps r&tqakd chatrp*g xlieJt $+f,e . ~ i t C q g s t a ~ o + , . i f . . , . . . ~ , . z the'~opportubit.i~s':were~~avai,l~b&e., , . . . - ~ , . ~ ' , '~

' I , , , ,~ , , . . ,. . , . . . . . . , . . ,. . ~. < I ' . . . , , . .~ ,

. bn th,+:otfier ha&, t h ~ ~ ~ s b ~ ~ ~ a b s e ~ t ' ~ 6 ~ a : ~ ~ n ~ l f a r e f ~ l t , . ~ . . i t was more- . ~

.irupor tarit \ to - b e a houeewi.9 &.rt&i&!:~ x ~ ~ r i k e r . : ::.!?.hesd v.omen nay:.3erceive t h e i ~ ' . " I - ;

opportunities as l ' init&d,' 0:: have, gii?&',iip .tr$ing :.to accompi%Gh .on their . ;btm,' . . or tn,ey may simply place higiiqr .&phas$ss on , thei r home l i f e and children. . ,, . The .important question is tg * 'a t ex ten^ $ 0 these women perceive thems~lves . .: , and the i r l ives as stagnating., titwarted:.by their .responsibilities to their. . . . . ~ . .

children and home; ,'and , . . hence;- ha ,LQb.g~~,:'have :fhej!+$,iva. ., to.,bhangg, t h e p l i £ a .: . , ,.. . . . . > ' ~ . . . . . . . ,. -. , .. . . . . . . . . . . . styles/ .*.~ '~ , ' , , ., ( . , ~ . . -, . . . . . . .. , . , ~ , .

., " . , .

. . . ~. , ; I . . . , . , . . . . . . . . . . . ' . ~ . ,, . . . . . . . . . . . . , ~ ' , , ~ ' . , ; I : ' . ,

tiarried women would ratihef, achrkvva $&t.is~ac.t+ii ths&gh the .acco@pli$~- .:, :, , mencs of other .fani&'nembps' indicating that they 'were not highly motivated : . .:

. . sa t i s f ac t ion from tLe t r ad i t i ona l f ina le : -a rcas , ' the personal areas, and t h e i r : ' rrorlc, health, an6 f inanc ia l s i tua t ion . ~ h e y ' - ~ l ~ o expressed greater overal l J i f e s a t i s f ac t ion . They were not, a&ever, d i f f e r eb t i i t ed from hgsband-absent

.~ women on sa t i s f ac t ion with chi ldren and work.' : , . ' " . , , . . .

The l o w e s t sac i s fac t ion for - both mar i ta l $oup&ithin the t r ad i t i ona l female a reas was expressed iil r e l a t i on t o husband or men'in general. The married group was more s a t i s f i e d with men than were husband-absent' women. This finding i l l u s t r a t e s the obvious difference between the two g r o u p . O f i n t e r e s t i s t h e f ind ine t h a t both groups pared t o t he other t r a d i t t h a t causes the women t o blame 011' t h e i r husbands, s i

, must provide f o r t he famil

With respect t o t h e p on tile ilusband-absent wonen. It 'appears employed, she experienced grea te r person she was t h e least happy.

The husband-absent women on welfare were par t icu la r ly low i n as6ects of s e l f s a t i s f ac t ion . Again, t h i s s i t ua t ion was l e s s ' devastating f o r the, e~ployed. Employment may 'be a v i ab l e znd worthwlif 16, ,measure f o r , inproving the personal s a t i s f ac t ion and se l f respect of '&usband-.&sent, 'welfare worn&. Overall, happiness appears t o be a rolls;

. .

iIus5and-absent wonen differentiated two '.areas of s a t i s f ac t ion -- work and ove ra l l l i f e s a t i s f ac t ion , while mar of s a t i s f ac t ion with these two areas. fac t ion f rou working than

In a comparison between women who were s a t i s f i e d with t h f i r hoLsework and women who were s a t i s f i e d with t h e i r jobs, a number of independent var iabl cane i n t o play. Husband-absence was pos i t ive ly re la ted t o s a t i s f a c t i o n with work, but having an unemployed husband as negatively re la ted . I f a . woman had no husband she was more s a t i s f i e d r i i t h a job, but i f her husbandwas not working, arid she worked because of necessity, she did not f ind worliihg a s sn t i s f ying,

. . Sat i s fac t ion with housework was negatively r e l a t ed t o being employed.

Such women were h i p i n s a t i s f ac t ion with t he way they weri? r a i s ing t h e i r . . ~' .. . . children. . ~ ~

., ~ . , I '. ~

T t appears, then, t h a t husband-abseut women tend t o f ind sa t i s fac t ion outside the :lone a s workers, while i t is eas ie r f o r married women t o derive sa t i s f ac t ion from t h e i r children, husband, and housework. 5 'I

Two personali ty typologies emcrged from the data . Tile f i r s t ,is suggested by the diusat ininct ion expressed by husband-absent women with respect t o

themselves and the t r a d i t i o n a l female a r e a s of concern. These %?omen perceive themselves more as subjec t s than as objects , and nence, develop an independent S p i r i t a n d se l f determination. Taeyaxh ib i t ins t rudenta l behaviors, but . a t t he saae t h e do not l o s e t h e i r exgressive behavioys. They experience l e s s ove ra l l s a t i s f ac t i on , but receive s a t i s f a c t i o n from employment, indicating t h a t they Search f o r other methods outs ide t h e i r fami l ies and homes t o achieve, success and fu l f i l l r aen t . , Since these wonen express optimism about t h e i r fu ture it is possible t h a t they a r e r&adying themselves f o r s i gn i f i can t changes.

. . Im~licati .ons fo~&rrs_onalii+ Type I: . ,. 1. The women express optinism =bout t h . These feel ings be reinforced by proviGing opportuni t ies f o r trainzng and employment.

2. Instrumental bekaviors and s e l f determination a r e funct ional and necessary f o r women i n a one-parent family. T,iese behaviors a r e a l so functional i n the work in^ world. Encouragement of such behaviors would develop the women's s e l f - concept which, in turn, would help her cope with many of t he problems she encounters both a t home o r i n employmenr.

The second persoiial i ty type is -evidenced by the married women. . n e y por t ray 'woman' a s wi fe and ,;sother, They perceive themselves a s objects rather than sub jec t s - I n Beauvoir'o term, t h e Second sex. They achieve s a t i s f ac t i on t h r o u g l ~ ~ t h e accomplishments of other faruily members and from t h e i r hone l i f e i n general. They a r e more l i k e l y t o be s a t i s f i e d with themselves i n the r o l e of t r a d i t i o n a l female a r ea s - housework, chi ldren, cnurch, and f r iends - the standard kinder, lcuche, arid kirche. , This descr ip t ion app l i z s more speci- f i c a l l y t o t he nonemployed, married women on welfa

. , ,

Implication fo r Personal i ty Type 11: ~,

i larriage appears t o be an important element in achieving personal satis- fac t ion and happiness fo r these women. The f indings a l s o emphasize the sig- nif icance of home lac in t h e t~onen?s l i ve s . A s a r e s u l t , these women would no t be e a s i l y inspired t o change t h e i r l i f e circwnstances through such measure! a s employinent . I f such measures were necessary, employment i n the t r a d i t i o n a l female a r ea s would be advisable. Such work would help t h m t o both aqcep t~ ' emgloyment and f ind :persona l fu l f i l lmen t with a minimum of disrupt ion t o t h e i r s e l f image.

llegardless of the cause and e f f ec t d i rec t ion , and it probably is recip- roca l , any e f f o r t t o increase the women's l e v e l of self-esteem w i l l probably e-1- - ~ :heir self- concept, t h e i r fee l ings of competence and self-worth, anti i.i;~1 help them t o lead moreisatisfying l i v e s . This, in turn, would in- crease t h e women's a b i l i t y t o overcome b a r r i e r s themselves.

Vernon L . Allen (1970) discusses the d i s t i n c t i o n between the psychic versus s i t u a t i o n a l determinants of behavior. Iie contends t h a t i n t e rna l psycho l o e i c a l predisposi t ions may be paramount i n determining some behaviors whereas s i t u a t i o n a l and stimulus f ac to r s a r e doubtless of predominant influence i n

-. .. . . - . -. ' -Yy; ,*,?:.:,: ?,,*: -' z.'>:';J?t. , , i 'f ''

. ' /. * , other behsvi , ,.

. . ,. ..

With respect t o t he present report , . i t appears t ha t the married wome exhibi t a p l a c i d , content, and sa t l s f ie i l d i spos i t i on . ' They manifest . thes behaviors while s i t t i n g amidst poverty and hopelessness. ' m e question i s what extent do these women r a t iona l i ze t h e i r . s i t u a t i o n with respect t o finding sa t i s f ac t ion from t h e i r fami l ies and l i v e s i n general. It would appear tha t i n t h e i r case s i t u a t i o n a l fac tor$ a t e tho predominant influence on t h e i r behavior. Their l i f e ,circumstances overwhelm.,them, and so, they no longer question t h e extent of t h e i r discontent. They t e l l themselves they have a l l they want out of l i f e from t h e a family and home l i f e . '

I n comparison t o the masried women, the husband-absent appear t o be dynami individuals . . They.e;;hibit disconteilt and dqsires t o change. They have and had t h e s t r e n g t k t o r i d themselves of an incompetent husband. It would appear t h a t these women have in t e rna l predisposit ions t ha t determtne the degrce of s t rength of t h e i r s e l f -concepts.

~ ~

Tile d i s t i n c t i o n between 'psychic Gerius s i t ua t iona l detefminants of be- havior is pureLy speculat ive with respect t o these Sara', Fur ther , research , should be directed toward stud.ying the var ia t ion i n persoilality s t ruc ture and dynamics among low-incone women,keepin:ng the d i s t i nc t ion between psychologica and s i t u a t i o n a l determinants of behavio'r in mind.

Final ly , the lnajor of t h i s s tudy was whecher the. developnen of a pos i t ive s ~ l f ~ c o n c e p t was r'elated t o mar i ta l s ta tus . Findings consonan with t he f i r s t and:second hypotheses tend t o support t h i s re la t ionship. That is, t o t h e degree tha t lox-Licome women experience d i s sa t i s f ac t ion with t l i ves , t h e i r s t rength or weakness of self-concept w i l l be re la ted t o t h e i mar i ta l . s t a tu s .

... ,.,%, . ~*'$

..?::%,:*%?$; X&S?, *, >~>$ , , , ,

.: LsE:+Tc .,.,. ~&~~$;~~~$;:@$>*;~;q$~?$*~kt: ;<=:cg:z~.>:$~~?$&g.~ . , - , , REFET(E$jC]CES, . ': . ,. :''-': LT..u.<" ' . . , a . . .. ... ,,.~. , , \,. ,>><,, A :2d;F, .,.&!a. 7~s&?3,+-.<~>,c,.- .---*$?::* . . . . >.6"~,* -.&* .X*%%b, . ~ -.

f i len, V. L., "The ~sycho logy ;of Pov'erty: ,. ~roblemi 'and ~ r o s p e c t s , "~sycho. l o g i c a l Factors i n Poverty, Chicago: idarkham Publ. Co., 1570, . -.

: , PP. 367-83. .- . . .., .

. . . . .... . . . , ..

~i ' shop , fi. S. (Florida Sta,te U.) The s e l f -~oncept. ' df t'he Welfare other: Some S o c i v l o ~ i c a l Correlates.' ~ i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , 1972,. 33: 3036

. . . . . . . ,

i n a i . . "The Role of ?ioti"ation and &lf-image ,& SocialC.nange in .Slum Areas," P s y c h o l o ~ i c a l Factors i n P o y e r t ~ , ~ e n l o n L. 'ill%& (ed .) Chicago: i.farkham Publ. ' Co., 1970, pp. 326-47,. ,

. .

d e Beauvoir, S. Tine Second' Sex. ,New ~ o r k : an tarn Books, -1949. . , ' . . . .

Feldman, If. and Feldman, i.1. A Study of t he ~ f f e c t s on the Family Due t o t b Employment of t he Low-Income Women Vol. I. (I1 and 111) : Pindings' and I u ~ l i c a t i o n s . I thaca, 1f.Y.: Corr~e l l University, Jan., 1872, (~r Contract Wo. 51-

. . , . . ,

Feldman, ;i. and i~eldman,' . Ii., "The Low-lncome t ibera ted :Women, "; &wan bcology Forum, Vol. 4 ( 2 ) , .Autum; 1973. pp.13-16.

. . . . . ~ . .

Guriu, G., "An h'xjectancy i ~ i > ~ r o z c h P O Job Tr;liilirig Pro~rcl;sc,"'I.oycRological . Factors i n Poverty, Vernon L. A11kil. (ed. j . Chicago: Urlcl~ani Publ. Co.

. . 19Jd, pp. 277-83.. . . . . . , .. .

ilerzog, h., "Is The-re a 'd re Vol. 11, 1965, pp. 3-10

Bill, J. J.; "Actitudcs EducationalSociology, Vol. 30, 1957, pp. 3.95-7. . , . ,

Iceisberg, L. r-, Chiacgo: Aldine Publ. Co., 1970.

Lewis, ii., "The Changing i4egro Family;' ~ h k itation's Children (ed .) New York: Colurhbia Universi ty Press, 1960. . .

idarsden, I). iIothet-s Alone. London: The, Penguin Press, 1963.

iicDonalci, K. 2. and ~yn the r , ' 2. U., "&elationship of ~ e ? f and Ideal-Self '~

Uescriptions with Sex , Xace, and C l a s s , i n Southern Adolescents," Journal of P e r s o n a l i t y , Vol. 1, 1965, pp. 85-8. -

rictiillan, S . . "Aspira t ioi~s of Low-income ..iothers," and the Faiuily; &y, 1967, pp. 287-37.

: , . . .~ <.:,;, - .... ;i -.., . ;= +, , . . .,. i. . r.

Rainwater, L. and Yancv. W. L. The i~iovnihan Xeoort and the P o l i t i c s of

.. A . S . , "Tie rloots of Ambivale~ce i n American Momen," iteadings i n the Psychology of \?omen, Judith is:. Bardwick (ed) i4ew ~ o r k : Harper and Xow Publisners, 1972, pp. 125-35. ,

. . a n . I. The Aelatianship between Self-Esteeiu and Aggression i n Two

Classes. dissertat ion Abstracts, 1964? 2 k 2G16.